I think dumb is a really soft way of describing Nazis going looking for trouble. What I think what happened was those shit heels went looking for trouble, pissed off the protesters. Protesters ran them off and the Nazi pricks used it as an excuse to open fire.
Now, the protesters don't have any right to chase off assholes, but I ain't gonna shed any tears if the Nazi's all go to jail.
That's just going off what we know so far, mostly coming from the only eyewitness video released, the press release from the BLM spokespeople, and the Nazi's posting their hate videos ahead of time.
It's amazing that 4chan has gone from Project Chanology in 2008, to armed Stasserites trying to disrupt protests on the streets of Chicago in just seven years.
4chan isn't a monolithic entity. Replace "4chan" in your statement with "the internet" and see how it reads.
That seems to be a habit of both 4chan people and the groups that split off of it. The idea that, because it's a collective of people, the utter scummyness that comes from it somehow shouldn't reflect on the site. They allow that shit to go on on that site, so it sure as hell does reflect on that site.
Yeah much like reddit with their horrid racism including the infamous subreddit. The company you keep definitely reflects back on you. Hell prior to racism and awful misogyny 4chan was known as a place that spread child porn.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Anyone that thinks they can be part of a huge internet community and not be tied up in bad stuff is deluded
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Yeah much like reddit with their horrid racism including the infamous subreddit. The company you keep definitely reflects back on you. Hell prior to racism and awful misogyny 4chan was known as a place that spread child porn.
"The company you keep" implies a meaningful relationship. Reddit has over 200 million unique visitors per month. When you are measuring in hundreds of million, "company you keep" is either an ignorant statement or deliberate deception.
4chan is "smaller" at 22 million unique visitors per month. 4chan has 1 million posts per day. Even if someone was paid to look at 4chan all day, every day, with a 108 hour / week contract with no vacation days, they still couldn't read everything on the site, so the idea that some dude who checks it for 15 minutes after work could be reasonably guilty by association for something he could not physically see under only hypothetical circumstances, let alone in an actual real life is absurd.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah much like reddit with their horrid racism including the infamous subreddit. The company you keep definitely reflects back on you. Hell prior to racism and awful misogyny 4chan was known as a place that spread child porn.
"The company you keep" implies a meaningful relationship. Reddit has over 200 million unique visitors per month. When you are measuring in hundreds of million, "company you keep" is either an ignorant statement or deliberate deception.
4chan is "smaller" at 22 million unique visitors per month. 4chan has 1 million posts per day. Even if someone was paid to look at 4chan all day, every day, with a 108 hour / week contract with no vacation days, they still couldn't read everything on the site, so the idea that some dude who checks it for 15 minutes after work could be reasonably guilty by association for something he could not physically see under only hypothetical circumstances, let alone in an actual real life is absurd.
If someone associates with a group that includes child pornographers, organized misogynists, organized racists, organized internet bullies, and is really really well known for all of those then whether they actually take part in it doesn't have as much impact as the fact that they continue to associate with that group.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
But it is a singular community. Owned and operated by one corporate entity with the power to moderate it if they so chose.
Which they don't. So the content then is representative of what they wish to see and reflects upon them.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
But it is a singular community. Owned and operated by one corporate entity with the power to moderate it if they so chose.
Which they don't. So the content then is representative of what they wish to see and reflects upon them.
That isn't how communities work.
Also, it continues to be a silly double standard. Verizon doesn't moderate text messages, but apparently Reddit is morally required to because ????.
If you prefer that all communication you receive is run through the Panopticon, that's weird to me, but it's a valid preference. But your preference is not other people's moral duty.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
I believe there is a threshold at which overarching moderation becomes practically impossible. Due to some glitch or the other, we can now census daily activity on these forums - about 300 people at a time today. That's nothing. 4chan has 7 million monthly users. Reddit has over 200 million.
We have never, ever had practice maintaining communities this large - if you can even call them communities. Just by sheer overwhelming sample size, you'll capture the worst deviants along with all ranges of normal users. You can stop part of it but never all of it, or even most of it. When you become part of that "community," you agree to be counted in what amounts to a country-sized population, comprised of people whose one unifying qualifying factor is internet access - not a moral code, not social maturity, not an awareness of anything approaching a social contract.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
But it is a singular community. Owned and operated by one corporate entity with the power to moderate it if they so chose.
Which they don't. So the content then is representative of what they wish to see and reflects upon them.
That isn't how communities work.
Also, it continues to be a silly double standard. Verizon doesn't moderate text messages, but apparently Reddit is morally required to because ????.
If you prefer that all communication you receive is run through the Panopticon, that's weird to me, but it's a valid preference. But your preference is not other people's moral duty.
And we also talked about how Internet access points are not public Internet forums. And presumable how private communications are not public Internet forums. And presumably how most hosting companies actually do moderate their content.
It's not like 4chan hasn't had this problem before. They got rid of their porn problems did they not? If they can get rid of one skeezy subsection but not another skeezy subsection it implies support. Unless, you know, they don't want to.
+7
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Problems of scale in the user-base can be solved with crowd-based moderation, which actually solves everyone's problem by ensuring that, if terrible content remains prominent, it's because the user-base as a whole approves of it. Arguably I'd say Reddit works well in that regard, because as far as I know--holy cow this is the terrorism thread. What the fuck are we talking about?
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
But it is a singular community. Owned and operated by one corporate entity with the power to moderate it if they so chose.
Which they don't. So the content then is representative of what they wish to see and reflects upon them.
That isn't how communities work.
Also, it continues to be a silly double standard. Verizon doesn't moderate text messages, but apparently Reddit is morally required to because ????.
If you prefer that all communication you receive is run through the Panopticon, that's weird to me, but it's a valid preference. But your preference is not other people's moral duty.
Of course it's how communities work. Especially communities that operate within the confines of something provided and run and moderated by one entity. It's how this community works. The community we have here exists in the form it does because the moderation team makes it happen.
And it's not a double standard unless you wanna pretend a forum is an ISP. And here I thought we'd settled this kind of stupid false equivalency with net neutrality.
It's real simple dude if you aren't shoving your head in the sand: Reddit moderates it's content. Hence the content that it chooses to allow to exist reflects on itself because it represents what Reddit wants to be. Because if they didn't want to be that, they'd remove it via moderation like they do with other things.
Problems of scale in the user-base can be solved with crowd-based moderation, which actually solves everyone's problem by ensuring that, if terrible content remains prominent, it's because the user-base as a whole approves of it. Arguably I'd say Reddit works well in that regard, because as far as I know--holy cow this is the terrorism thread. What the fuck are we talking about?
I think we're discussing how sites like 4chan can be terrorist cells. I think.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
They were literally shot by white supremacists. How is "racism is over" not dead yet.
Who are you quoting?
I was commenting on the state of racial relations in the United States and how this incident of terrorism relates to that.
But if you're asking me for an example, Ben Carson very recently said that he says no evidence of racial bias in the US, and it's an extremely common conservative talking point, so I'm sure if you do some quick googling you'll find many more instances of the sentiment being expressed!
Please stop erasing the experience of a black man who got into medicine in the seventies cis het white guy. But no, a tiny, tiny minority of people have ever argued this. That racial relations are better which is invariably the sentiment is quite different to the strawman you're attacking. It's just obnoxious, this is the equivalent of people who pull out random crazies who ban yoga classes because it's cultural appropriation, and railing againt them as thought any meaningful number of people on the left agree.
What is your fucking problem? You don't even live in America and yet you feel this overwhelming need to comment on racial and gun issues in the shittiest possible way when you don't even have full context.
Pretty telling that literally just disagreeing with your circle jerk is "the shittiest way possible". Everythings not as shit as you think it is and life is a lot more complicated than viewing everything through the kyriarchy and posting fringe nutjobs and pretending that's the only alternative view of the situation, and everyone who has a differing opinion only does so out of extreme ignorance.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
But it is a singular community. Owned and operated by one corporate entity with the power to moderate it if they so chose.
Which they don't. So the content then is representative of what they wish to see and reflects upon them.
That isn't how communities work.
Also, it continues to be a silly double standard. Verizon doesn't moderate text messages, but apparently Reddit is morally required to because ????.
If you prefer that all communication you receive is run through the Panopticon, that's weird to me, but it's a valid preference. But your preference is not other people's moral duty.
Verizon isn't a web forum on the internet, that's why Reddit and 4chan are a community.
They were literally shot by white supremacists. How is "racism is over" not dead yet.
Who are you quoting?
I was commenting on the state of racial relations in the United States and how this incident of terrorism relates to that.
But if you're asking me for an example, Ben Carson very recently said that he says no evidence of racial bias in the US, and it's an extremely common conservative talking point, so I'm sure if you do some quick googling you'll find many more instances of the sentiment being expressed!
Please stop erasing the experience of a black man who got into medicine in the seventies cis het white guy. But no, a tiny, tiny minority of people have ever argued this. That racial relations are better which is invariably the sentiment is quite different to the strawman you're attacking. It's just obnoxious, this is the equivalent of people who pull out random crazies who ban yoga classes because it's cultural appropriation, and railing againt them as thought any meaningful number of people on the left agree.
What is your fucking problem? You don't even live in America and yet you feel this overwhelming need to comment on racial and gun issues in the shittiest possible way when you don't even have full context.
Pretty telling that literally just disagreeing with your circle jerk is "the shittiest way possible". Everythings not as shit as you think it is and life is a lot more complicated than viewing everything through the kyriarchy and posting fringe nutjobs and pretending that's the only alternative view of the situation, and everyone who has a differing opinion only does so out of extreme ignorance.
Given that racial bias in the US is an easily established fact, the only alternative view of the situation is based out of extreme ignorance.
Your disagreement is not just weird and pointless to the discussion and phrased in the most convoluted way and burdened with strange assumptions, it's also just wrong.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
But it is a singular community. Owned and operated by one corporate entity with the power to moderate it if they so chose.
Which they don't. So the content then is representative of what they wish to see and reflects upon them.
That isn't how communities work.
Also, it continues to be a silly double standard. Verizon doesn't moderate text messages, but apparently Reddit is morally required to because ????.
If you prefer that all communication you receive is run through the Panopticon, that's weird to me, but it's a valid preference. But your preference is not other people's moral duty.
Verizon isn't a web forum on the internet, that's why Reddit and 4chan are a community.
What's the difference between sending a racial slur from person A to person B over one type of packet switched network to another that fundamentally alters the relationship between the runners of said infrastructure and their willing clients? Reddit offers a better UI for many to many communication, but that feature is both supported and utilized on a smaller scale via SMS/MMS, particularly once you go into apps.
For example: Five coworkers have both a subreddit for their business, and a group text (3 use ATT, 2 use Verizon). One of those people says something untoward (but not illegal or dangerous) on the subreddit, and repeats the same message over group text just in case no one sees it. Why is reddit required to shoulder the tremendous expense of moderating said comment, whereas Verizon and ATT are allowed to sit back and drink mai-tais?
To tie this back into terrorism, the implications of this apply to, say, encrypted communications. If relying on community moderation to police mere slurs on a site with 200 million people is unconscionably lax, surely there is a duty magnitudes of order greater to prevent mass murdering terror acts?
I'd argue that outside of actual armaments, it is perfectly moral to provide technology, wehther in the form of a discrete physical device, or a managed service/hosting that is primarily used for good purposes without deriving a moral duty to babysit grown adults to make sure they aren't doing anything wrong.
They were literally shot by white supremacists. How is "racism is over" not dead yet.
Who are you quoting?
I was commenting on the state of racial relations in the United States and how this incident of terrorism relates to that.
But if you're asking me for an example, Ben Carson very recently said that he says no evidence of racial bias in the US, and it's an extremely common conservative talking point, so I'm sure if you do some quick googling you'll find many more instances of the sentiment being expressed!
Please stop erasing the experience of a black man who got into medicine in the seventies cis het white guy. But no, a tiny, tiny minority of people have ever argued this. That racial relations are better which is invariably the sentiment is quite different to the strawman you're attacking. It's just obnoxious, this is the equivalent of people who pull out random crazies who ban yoga classes because it's cultural appropriation, and railing againt them as thought any meaningful number of people on the left agree.
What is your fucking problem? You don't even live in America and yet you feel this overwhelming need to comment on racial and gun issues in the shittiest possible way when you don't even have full context.
Pretty telling that literally just disagreeing with your circle jerk is "the shittiest way possible". Everythings not as shit as you think it is and life is a lot more complicated than viewing everything through the kyriarchy and posting fringe nutjobs and pretending that's the only alternative view of the situation, and everyone who has a differing opinion only does so out of extreme ignorance.
Given that racial bias in the US is an easily established fact, the only alternative view of the situation is based out of extreme ignorance.
Your disagreement is not just weird and pointless to the discussion and phrased in the most convoluted way and burdened with strange assumptions, it's also just wrong.
That you've read me pointing out that "racism is over" is something said sarcastically a thousand times more frequently by people than it's ever said in genuine honesty, which is an atempt to control the dialogue as "racial bias doesn't exist" perfectly underlines the point I'm making.
We have had this discussion in the reddit thread. By choosing not to moderate the website is endorsing. Just as we don't have that shit here because we moderate and for basically no other reason. This place was super bad before the law came down, it is quite possibly the perfect example of how you can shape a community through moderation to excise those things that you don't want to be associated with.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
But it is a singular community. Owned and operated by one corporate entity with the power to moderate it if they so chose.
Which they don't. So the content then is representative of what they wish to see and reflects upon them.
That isn't how communities work.
Also, it continues to be a silly double standard. Verizon doesn't moderate text messages, but apparently Reddit is morally required to because ????.
If you prefer that all communication you receive is run through the Panopticon, that's weird to me, but it's a valid preference. But your preference is not other people's moral duty.
Verizon isn't a web forum on the internet, that's why Reddit and 4chan are a community.
What's the difference between sending a racial slur from person A to person B over one type of packet switched network to another that fundamentally alters the relationship between the runners of said infrastructure and their willing clients? Reddit offers a better UI for many to many communication, but that feature is both supported and utilized on a smaller scale via SMS/MMS, particularly once you go into apps.
For example: Five coworkers have both a subreddit for their business, and a group text (3 use ATT, 2 use Verizon). One of those people says something untoward (but not illegal or dangerous) on the subreddit, and repeats the same message over group text just in case no one sees it. Why is reddit required to shoulder the tremendous expense of moderating said comment, whereas Verizon and ATT are allowed to sit back and drink mai-tais?
To tie this back into terrorism, the implications of this apply to, say, encrypted communications. If relying on community moderation to police mere slurs on a site with 200 million people is unconscionably lax, surely there is a duty magnitudes of order greater to prevent mass murdering terror acts?
I'd argue that outside of actual armaments, it is perfectly moral to provide technology, wehther in the form of a discrete physical device, or a managed service/hosting that is primarily used for good purposes without deriving a moral duty to babysit grown adults to make sure they aren't doing anything wrong.
The very clear and obvious difference is that on Reddit, it is publicly accessible. A text message is not. A post may be directed specifically to one person, but at the same time, is being made in an openly searchable space that Joe Average can find and read, and thus is a public statement and not a personal communication.
They were literally shot by white supremacists. How is "racism is over" not dead yet.
Who are you quoting?
I was commenting on the state of racial relations in the United States and how this incident of terrorism relates to that.
But if you're asking me for an example, Ben Carson very recently said that he says no evidence of racial bias in the US, and it's an extremely common conservative talking point, so I'm sure if you do some quick googling you'll find many more instances of the sentiment being expressed!
Please stop erasing the experience of a black man who got into medicine in the seventies cis het white guy. But no, a tiny, tiny minority of people have ever argued this. That racial relations are better which is invariably the sentiment is quite different to the strawman you're attacking. It's just obnoxious, this is the equivalent of people who pull out random crazies who ban yoga classes because it's cultural appropriation, and railing againt them as thought any meaningful number of people on the left agree.
What is your fucking problem? You don't even live in America and yet you feel this overwhelming need to comment on racial and gun issues in the shittiest possible way when you don't even have full context.
Pretty telling that literally just disagreeing with your circle jerk is "the shittiest way possible". Everythings not as shit as you think it is and life is a lot more complicated than viewing everything through the kyriarchy and posting fringe nutjobs and pretending that's the only alternative view of the situation, and everyone who has a differing opinion only does so out of extreme ignorance.
Given that racial bias in the US is an easily established fact, the only alternative view of the situation is based out of extreme ignorance.
Your disagreement is not just weird and pointless to the discussion and phrased in the most convoluted way and burdened with strange assumptions, it's also just wrong.
That you've read me pointing out that "racism is over" is something said sarcastically a thousand times more frequently by people than it's ever said in genuine honesty, which is an atempt to control the dialogue as "racial bias doesn't exist" perfectly underlines the point I'm making.
It's amazing how these few fringe instances just keep happening over and over and over to specific groups of people by other specific groups of people.
leitner i am inclined to disagree with your statement that "racism is over" is a fringe view, i think you will find a surprising amount of people out there who genuinely for real believe that it is something which only happened in History
however i do not think that asking questions about this makes you an asshole
I've also already posted more than one link to show that the viewpoint is actually held by quite a few ignorant people in America, and I also suggested he google it if he was still dubious.
At this point this is a distraction to the main conversation. Leitner isn't ever going to agree that "racism is over" is a belief held not just by some minor fringe groups but by large swaths of the American population, so I don't see the purpose in engaging with him on that point further.
There's a lot of things we could be discussing that have value, educating Leitner on racial issues in America isn't one of them because that's a road that goes nowhere.
Yeah much like reddit with their horrid racism including the infamous subreddit. The company you keep definitely reflects back on you. Hell prior to racism and awful misogyny 4chan was known as a place that spread child porn.
"The company you keep" implies a meaningful relationship. Reddit has over 200 million unique visitors per month. When you are measuring in hundreds of million, "company you keep" is either an ignorant statement or deliberate deception.
4chan is "smaller" at 22 million unique visitors per month. 4chan has 1 million posts per day. Even if someone was paid to look at 4chan all day, every day, with a 108 hour / week contract with no vacation days, they still couldn't read everything on the site, so the idea that some dude who checks it for 15 minutes after work could be reasonably guilty by association for something he could not physically see under only hypothetical circumstances, let alone in an actual real life is absurd.
If someone associates with a group that includes child pornographers, organized misogynists, organized racists, organized internet bullies, and is really really well known for all of those then whether they actually take part in it doesn't have as much impact as the fact that they continue to associate with that group.
To turn the argument around, it's like blaming all Muslims for choosing to be part of a community that includes bloodthirsty jihadists and insufficiently policing.
The analogy doesn't quite gel, yeah, but guilt by association is a tricky thing when the wide majority of your community members are neutral-to-good people.
0
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Yeah much like reddit with their horrid racism including the infamous subreddit. The company you keep definitely reflects back on you. Hell prior to racism and awful misogyny 4chan was known as a place that spread child porn.
"The company you keep" implies a meaningful relationship. Reddit has over 200 million unique visitors per month. When you are measuring in hundreds of million, "company you keep" is either an ignorant statement or deliberate deception.
4chan is "smaller" at 22 million unique visitors per month. 4chan has 1 million posts per day. Even if someone was paid to look at 4chan all day, every day, with a 108 hour / week contract with no vacation days, they still couldn't read everything on the site, so the idea that some dude who checks it for 15 minutes after work could be reasonably guilty by association for something he could not physically see under only hypothetical circumstances, let alone in an actual real life is absurd.
If someone associates with a group that includes child pornographers, organized misogynists, organized racists, organized internet bullies, and is really really well known for all of those then whether they actually take part in it doesn't have as much impact as the fact that they continue to associate with that group.
To turn the argument around, it's like blaming all Muslims for choosing to be part of a community that includes bloodthirsty jihadists and insufficiently policing.
The analogy doesn't quite gel, yeah, but guilt by association is a tricky thing when the wide majority of your community members are neutral-to-good people.
The point where your analogy falls apart is at Choice:
4channers and Redditors choose to be such, while the majority of Muslims are born into their vague association with terrible elements.
Its hella goosey to associate someone's religion with someone's internet community. Like seriously that's not just a bad analogy its patently insulting.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Its hella goosey to associate someone's religion with someone's internet community. Like seriously that's not just a bad analogy its patently insulting.
Yeah, but in the opposite fashion. No one tells their naive 5 year old that their favorite reddit poster walked on water.
Also, to the best of my knowledge, moot (the founder of 4chan) has never condoned slavery, which puts him morally ahead of many popular religious prophets, so...
The first amendment cleverly protects (at least from congress) both the right to religion and the right to criticize it. It isn't goosey. It is smart. I, for one, am thankful for the first amendment. It stands the test of time for my money:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
“Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
― Marcus Aurelius
I'm fine with holding only the users (and any awful boards they participate in) that say awful shit for their words, rather than the entire user base. Sadly, 4/8chan were designed for the sole purpose of making that impossible. So the only two options are either to hold everyone accountable, or no one accountable. Personally, I'm not particularly interested in doing the latter.
The first amendment cleverly protects (at least from congress) both the right to religion and the right to criticize it. It isn't goosey. It is smart. I, for one, am thankful for the first amendment. It stands the test of time for my money:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
I ... uh, what does this have to do with anything being said?
Yeah much like reddit with their horrid racism including the infamous subreddit. The company you keep definitely reflects back on you. Hell prior to racism and awful misogyny 4chan was known as a place that spread child porn.
"The company you keep" implies a meaningful relationship. Reddit has over 200 million unique visitors per month. When you are measuring in hundreds of million, "company you keep" is either an ignorant statement or deliberate deception.
4chan is "smaller" at 22 million unique visitors per month. 4chan has 1 million posts per day. Even if someone was paid to look at 4chan all day, every day, with a 108 hour / week contract with no vacation days, they still couldn't read everything on the site, so the idea that some dude who checks it for 15 minutes after work could be reasonably guilty by association for something he could not physically see under only hypothetical circumstances, let alone in an actual real life is absurd.
If someone associates with a group that includes child pornographers, organized misogynists, organized racists, organized internet bullies, and is really really well known for all of those then whether they actually take part in it doesn't have as much impact as the fact that they continue to associate with that group.
To turn the argument around, it's like blaming all Muslims for choosing to be part of a community that includes bloodthirsty jihadists and insufficiently policing.
The analogy doesn't quite gel, yeah, but guilt by association is a tricky thing when the wide majority of your community members are neutral-to-good people.
The point where your analogy falls apart is at Choice:
4channers and Redditors choose to be such, while the majority of Muslims are born into their vague association with terrible elements.
When do we start making choices? I don't think I ever chose to be part of Penny Arcade Forums. It just happened, like a chemical reaction or instinct.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Yeah much like reddit with their horrid racism including the infamous subreddit. The company you keep definitely reflects back on you. Hell prior to racism and awful misogyny 4chan was known as a place that spread child porn.
"The company you keep" implies a meaningful relationship. Reddit has over 200 million unique visitors per month. When you are measuring in hundreds of million, "company you keep" is either an ignorant statement or deliberate deception.
4chan is "smaller" at 22 million unique visitors per month. 4chan has 1 million posts per day. Even if someone was paid to look at 4chan all day, every day, with a 108 hour / week contract with no vacation days, they still couldn't read everything on the site, so the idea that some dude who checks it for 15 minutes after work could be reasonably guilty by association for something he could not physically see under only hypothetical circumstances, let alone in an actual real life is absurd.
If someone associates with a group that includes child pornographers, organized misogynists, organized racists, organized internet bullies, and is really really well known for all of those then whether they actually take part in it doesn't have as much impact as the fact that they continue to associate with that group.
To turn the argument around, it's like blaming all Muslims for choosing to be part of a community that includes bloodthirsty jihadists and insufficiently policing.
The analogy doesn't quite gel, yeah, but guilt by association is a tricky thing when the wide majority of your community members are neutral-to-good people.
The point where your analogy falls apart is at Choice:
4channers and Redditors choose to be such, while the majority of Muslims are born into their vague association with terrible elements.
When do we start making choices? I don't think I ever chose to be part of Penny Arcade Forums. It just happened, like a chemical reaction or instinct.
Did you choose to stay or move on when the novelty wore off?
Yeah much like reddit with their horrid racism including the infamous subreddit. The company you keep definitely reflects back on you. Hell prior to racism and awful misogyny 4chan was known as a place that spread child porn.
"The company you keep" implies a meaningful relationship. Reddit has over 200 million unique visitors per month. When you are measuring in hundreds of million, "company you keep" is either an ignorant statement or deliberate deception.
4chan is "smaller" at 22 million unique visitors per month. 4chan has 1 million posts per day. Even if someone was paid to look at 4chan all day, every day, with a 108 hour / week contract with no vacation days, they still couldn't read everything on the site, so the idea that some dude who checks it for 15 minutes after work could be reasonably guilty by association for something he could not physically see under only hypothetical circumstances, let alone in an actual real life is absurd.
If someone associates with a group that includes child pornographers, organized misogynists, organized racists, organized internet bullies, and is really really well known for all of those then whether they actually take part in it doesn't have as much impact as the fact that they continue to associate with that group.
To turn the argument around, it's like blaming all Muslims for choosing to be part of a community that includes bloodthirsty jihadists and insufficiently policing.
The analogy doesn't quite gel, yeah, but guilt by association is a tricky thing when the wide majority of your community members are neutral-to-good people.
The point where your analogy falls apart is at Choice:
4channers and Redditors choose to be such, while the majority of Muslims are born into their vague association with terrible elements.
When do we start making choices? I don't think I ever chose to be part of Penny Arcade Forums. It just happened, like a chemical reaction or instinct.
This is so broad as to be absolutely meaningless.
"Hey man, we're, like, biomechanical machines man. I can't be held responsible for my actions, daddio"
Muddypaws on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I'm pretty sure he was joking, guys.
0
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
It's one of those "ha ha ... heh" jokes. Kind of hard to find an emoticon for that
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
This one has some use for things of that nature, in SE
:rotate:
They were literally shot by white supremacists. How is "racism is over" not dead yet.
Who are you quoting?
I was commenting on the state of racial relations in the United States and how this incident of terrorism relates to that.
But if you're asking me for an example, Ben Carson very recently said that he says no evidence of racial bias in the US, and it's an extremely common conservative talking point, so I'm sure if you do some quick googling you'll find many more instances of the sentiment being expressed!
Please stop erasing the experience of a black man who got into medicine in the seventies cis het white guy. But no, a tiny, tiny minority of people have ever argued this. That racial relations are better which is invariably the sentiment is quite different to the strawman you're attacking. It's just obnoxious, this is the equivalent of people who pull out random crazies who ban yoga classes because it's cultural appropriation, and railing againt them as thought any meaningful number of people on the left agree.
What is your fucking problem? You don't even live in America and yet you feel this overwhelming need to comment on racial and gun issues in the shittiest possible way when you don't even have full context.
Pretty telling that literally just disagreeing with your circle jerk is "the shittiest way possible". Everythings not as shit as you think it is and life is a lot more complicated than viewing everything through the kyriarchy and posting fringe nutjobs and pretending that's the only alternative view of the situation, and everyone who has a differing opinion only does so out of extreme ignorance.
Given that racial bias in the US is an easily established fact, the only alternative view of the situation is based out of extreme ignorance.
Your disagreement is not just weird and pointless to the discussion and phrased in the most convoluted way and burdened with strange assumptions, it's also just wrong.
That you've read me pointing out that "racism is over" is something said sarcastically a thousand times more frequently by people than it's ever said in genuine honesty, which is an atempt to control the dialogue as "racial bias doesn't exist" perfectly underlines the point I'm making.
This may be one of those things that not living in the US shields you from because people declaring that "racism is over" is such a common problem that it has made it's way into the cultural zeitgeist of the US.
If you don't live here you are, very likely, only going to see people using that to make fun of the people who use it earnestly. Because there are a lot of people who use that phrase or ideology that a single event or milestone meant the end of racism in the past.
Posts
That seems to be a habit of both 4chan people and the groups that split off of it. The idea that, because it's a collective of people, the utter scummyness that comes from it somehow shouldn't reflect on the site. They allow that shit to go on on that site, so it sure as hell does reflect on that site.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Why?
"The company you keep" implies a meaningful relationship. Reddit has over 200 million unique visitors per month. When you are measuring in hundreds of million, "company you keep" is either an ignorant statement or deliberate deception.
4chan is "smaller" at 22 million unique visitors per month. 4chan has 1 million posts per day. Even if someone was paid to look at 4chan all day, every day, with a 108 hour / week contract with no vacation days, they still couldn't read everything on the site, so the idea that some dude who checks it for 15 minutes after work could be reasonably guilty by association for something he could not physically see under only hypothetical circumstances, let alone in an actual real life is absurd.
If someone associates with a group that includes child pornographers, organized misogynists, organized racists, organized internet bullies, and is really really well known for all of those then whether they actually take part in it doesn't have as much impact as the fact that they continue to associate with that group.
Yeah, and I said it was foolishness. The idea of a singular community with a single set of guidelines that spans close to a quarter billion people over 200+ countries and multiple languages is ludicrous. It's not only impossible, but it isn't even laudable. Moreover, the level of moderation to even begin to approach it would require is simply unfeasible at any reasonable price.
Even as small as the PA forums are, there are already cultural and user group skews between subforums. Honestly, for all I know, SE++ could have a "Let's assassinate [world leader]" thread on the front page right this second with concrete details, map layouts, being organizing funding, etc , and I wouldn't find out about it until someone linked in in [chat] or it got onto the news. Good or bad, whatever happens in there doesn't reflect on me, unless you are outright arguing I have a moral duty to view all user submitted content on websites I visit, but I'd argue that is prima facie ridiculous.
But it is a singular community. Owned and operated by one corporate entity with the power to moderate it if they so chose.
Which they don't. So the content then is representative of what they wish to see and reflects upon them.
That isn't how communities work.
Also, it continues to be a silly double standard. Verizon doesn't moderate text messages, but apparently Reddit is morally required to because ????.
If you prefer that all communication you receive is run through the Panopticon, that's weird to me, but it's a valid preference. But your preference is not other people's moral duty.
I believe there is a threshold at which overarching moderation becomes practically impossible. Due to some glitch or the other, we can now census daily activity on these forums - about 300 people at a time today. That's nothing. 4chan has 7 million monthly users. Reddit has over 200 million.
We have never, ever had practice maintaining communities this large - if you can even call them communities. Just by sheer overwhelming sample size, you'll capture the worst deviants along with all ranges of normal users. You can stop part of it but never all of it, or even most of it. When you become part of that "community," you agree to be counted in what amounts to a country-sized population, comprised of people whose one unifying qualifying factor is internet access - not a moral code, not social maturity, not an awareness of anything approaching a social contract.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
And we also talked about how Internet access points are not public Internet forums. And presumable how private communications are not public Internet forums. And presumably how most hosting companies actually do moderate their content.
It's not like 4chan hasn't had this problem before. They got rid of their porn problems did they not? If they can get rid of one skeezy subsection but not another skeezy subsection it implies support. Unless, you know, they don't want to.
Of course it's how communities work. Especially communities that operate within the confines of something provided and run and moderated by one entity. It's how this community works. The community we have here exists in the form it does because the moderation team makes it happen.
And it's not a double standard unless you wanna pretend a forum is an ISP. And here I thought we'd settled this kind of stupid false equivalency with net neutrality.
It's real simple dude if you aren't shoving your head in the sand: Reddit moderates it's content. Hence the content that it chooses to allow to exist reflects on itself because it represents what Reddit wants to be. Because if they didn't want to be that, they'd remove it via moderation like they do with other things.
I think we're discussing how sites like 4chan can be terrorist cells. I think.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Pretty telling that literally just disagreeing with your circle jerk is "the shittiest way possible". Everythings not as shit as you think it is and life is a lot more complicated than viewing everything through the kyriarchy and posting fringe nutjobs and pretending that's the only alternative view of the situation, and everyone who has a differing opinion only does so out of extreme ignorance.
Verizon isn't a web forum on the internet, that's why Reddit and 4chan are a community.
Given that racial bias in the US is an easily established fact, the only alternative view of the situation is based out of extreme ignorance.
Your disagreement is not just weird and pointless to the discussion and phrased in the most convoluted way and burdened with strange assumptions, it's also just wrong.
What's the difference between sending a racial slur from person A to person B over one type of packet switched network to another that fundamentally alters the relationship between the runners of said infrastructure and their willing clients? Reddit offers a better UI for many to many communication, but that feature is both supported and utilized on a smaller scale via SMS/MMS, particularly once you go into apps.
For example: Five coworkers have both a subreddit for their business, and a group text (3 use ATT, 2 use Verizon). One of those people says something untoward (but not illegal or dangerous) on the subreddit, and repeats the same message over group text just in case no one sees it. Why is reddit required to shoulder the tremendous expense of moderating said comment, whereas Verizon and ATT are allowed to sit back and drink mai-tais?
To tie this back into terrorism, the implications of this apply to, say, encrypted communications. If relying on community moderation to police mere slurs on a site with 200 million people is unconscionably lax, surely there is a duty magnitudes of order greater to prevent mass murdering terror acts?
I'd argue that outside of actual armaments, it is perfectly moral to provide technology, wehther in the form of a discrete physical device, or a managed service/hosting that is primarily used for good purposes without deriving a moral duty to babysit grown adults to make sure they aren't doing anything wrong.
That you've read me pointing out that "racism is over" is something said sarcastically a thousand times more frequently by people than it's ever said in genuine honesty, which is an atempt to control the dialogue as "racial bias doesn't exist" perfectly underlines the point I'm making.
The very clear and obvious difference is that on Reddit, it is publicly accessible. A text message is not. A post may be directed specifically to one person, but at the same time, is being made in an openly searchable space that Joe Average can find and read, and thus is a public statement and not a personal communication.
What the hell point are you making?
And yeah, no, "racism is over" is a widespread belief. Simple google will show this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/18/half-of-american-whites-see-no-racism-around-them/
You can find plenty of other polls if you actually want to bother trying, they all point out the same thing.
however i do not think that asking questions about this makes you an asshole
At this point this is a distraction to the main conversation. Leitner isn't ever going to agree that "racism is over" is a belief held not just by some minor fringe groups but by large swaths of the American population, so I don't see the purpose in engaging with him on that point further.
There's a lot of things we could be discussing that have value, educating Leitner on racial issues in America isn't one of them because that's a road that goes nowhere.
To turn the argument around, it's like blaming all Muslims for choosing to be part of a community that includes bloodthirsty jihadists and insufficiently policing.
The analogy doesn't quite gel, yeah, but guilt by association is a tricky thing when the wide majority of your community members are neutral-to-good people.
The point where your analogy falls apart is at Choice:
4channers and Redditors choose to be such, while the majority of Muslims are born into their vague association with terrible elements.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Yeah, but in the opposite fashion. No one tells their naive 5 year old that their favorite reddit poster walked on water.
Also, to the best of my knowledge, moot (the founder of 4chan) has never condoned slavery, which puts him morally ahead of many popular religious prophets, so...
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Steam: pazython
I ... uh, what does this have to do with anything being said?
When do we start making choices? I don't think I ever chose to be part of Penny Arcade Forums. It just happened, like a chemical reaction or instinct.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Did you choose to stay or move on when the novelty wore off?
This is so broad as to be absolutely meaningless.
"Hey man, we're, like, biomechanical machines man. I can't be held responsible for my actions, daddio"
Difficult to tell, without a signifying emoticon.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
:rotate:
This may be one of those things that not living in the US shields you from because people declaring that "racism is over" is such a common problem that it has made it's way into the cultural zeitgeist of the US.
If you don't live here you are, very likely, only going to see people using that to make fun of the people who use it earnestly. Because there are a lot of people who use that phrase or ideology that a single event or milestone meant the end of racism in the past.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/magazine/americas-postracial-fantasy.html?referer=&_r=0